Lead prosecutor says evidence should be given ‘primordial importance’ in Sara impeachment trial

MANILA – Lead House Impeachment Prosecutor Rep. Gerville Luistro said the evidence presented before the Senate Impeachment Court on Vice President Sara Duterte’s case should be given “primordial importance,” following an SWS survey showing more Filipinos do not believe the prosecution’s evidence on Duterte’s alleged unexplained wealth compared to those who do. 

Luistro asserted “numbers don’t lie”, and the evidence that came from banks, government agencies, and documents submitted by Duterte herself. 

She also expressed doubts on the survey results.

“We wish to believe otherwise… Numbers do not lie. The evidence in Article 2, Unexplained Wealth, are based on figures, which were submitted by no less than the respondent Vice President,” Luistro said.

“While we consider survey as guidance, part of the several guidance in making a decision, we have to give primordial importance doon mismo sa weight ng evidence na nailatag mo. We understand that the senator-judges are likewise giving significance to survey. Nevertheless, between the weight of the evidence and the result of the survey, of course, we wish to express na we believe in the strength of our evidence,” she explained. 

House prosecution counsel and spokesperson Atty. Benjamin Tolosa Jr. shares this view.

“At the end of the day, I think the evidence is the matter that’s most important here, and which must guide them in reaching their decision of whether to convict or acquit. But of course, it’s also important, we also cannot just brush aside the opinion of the people… I think it’s just fair for everyone that we assess the sentiment of the people after the trial, meaning after everyone has presented evidence already, not just the prosecution. The defense as well. So I think that would be the more appropriate time to do it,” he said.

“Based on surveys that were conducted more recently, which we’ve discussed before, it appears that the public after hearing the evidence on unexplained wealth, they have a completely different opinion from what’s being shown in these surveys… How can you say that this accurately reflects the opinion of all of the entire public? That’s why, siguro, sometimes the results that we’re getting are different from each other, as conducted by these different survey agencies,” Tolosa added.

He noted that the results of the SWS survey conducted last September 21 to 27 are “a bit stale.”

“This was conducted… before we wrapped up and completed our presentation of evidence for unexplained wealth. So, obviously, the public at that time, they haven’t yet seen the evidence that we presented, the bank records, the AMLC transactions, the insurance policies, and certainly not the expert testimony of Atty. Alex Cabrera, where he summarized all of this after studying them, and where he presented that figure of unexplained wealth of P817 million to P1.5 billion,” Tolosa explained.

“I think it’s a little bit stale… At that time, the article on unexplained wealth hasn’t even started yet. So, and we believe this article that’s easier for the public to follow and appreciate and digest, and understand,” he added.

Tolosa said surveys are “useful tools”, but they are “not definitive.”

House Prosecution Counsel Atty. Lorna Kapunan, meanwhile, attributes the survey results to alleged “diversionary tactics” outside the impeachment court. 

“Alam naman natin ang style. ‘Pag malakas ang witness namin, aba sinasabayan ng presscon or public statement ng vice president na diversionary tactic. Kasi magaling siya sa mga ganyan na tinitira lahat, tinitira ang Senate, tinitira ang administration, tinitira ang prosecutors, tinitira lahat ng mga witnesses, syempre, ‘yun ang clickable. Clickbait ‘yun eh… The public would rather listen to the vice president than to what is happening in court, kaya ganyan siguro ang results ng survey,” Kapunan said.

“Nakita n’yo naman sa past hearings sa impeachment court, napakahaba ng cross-examination compared to the direct examination. Kunwari ang direct examination three hours. Ang cross-examination, kung minsan isang hapon o one and a half days… Not only is it a waste of our time, nagke-create siya ng impeachment fatigue. Napapagod na ang mga nanonood, so nagche-change channel sila. At ‘pag pinakinggan mo ‘yung cross-examination questions, wala namang punto. Ulit-ulit lang,” she added.

Kapunan reiterated her challenge to the Vice President to personally testify and defend herself before the Impeachment Court. If Duterte refuses, Kapunan said it will be “inconsistent with innocence.”

“Kung hindi niya matanggap ang challenge na ‘yun, duwag siya… Ang matapang ba, tumatakbo sa gyera?… Tumatakbo ba sa mga ganitong usapan? Hindi. ‘Pag hindi siya nag-appear, anong tawag natin doon? Duwag or may itinatago. And it is not consistent with innocence,” Kapunan said.

“Ang common na tao, ‘pag kinasuhan tayo ng hindi tama, galit na galit tayo. Pupunta tayo sa korte at sasabihin natin nagkakamali sila at nagsisinungaling sila, kasi innocent ako… That is the reaction of an innocent person. The reaction of a guilty person is not to appear. So I am reiterating my challenge to the Vice President. Make my day. Give us the opportunity to cross-examine you or to give you your day in court. Sabihin mo ‘yung gusto mong sabihin sa korte, at huwag sa press statement, huwag sa press conference,” she added.